LCD it's so bad, that even if I create a complete pure flat white background on Photoshop, the LCD fails baddly in present it. Not just it's not homogeneous but what should be white it's not really white, but bright gray. CRT have pure whites very intense in brightness that can hurt a little bit sensible eyes in a image like a white flat background.

I think that's one reason I hate so much the LCD effects of clipped whites, it's because it not just kill tonalities near white, but the clipped white itself it's not a true shinning white but something else, something uggly.

I didn't find anything decent to display any HD video. And the HD channels on my contry, TV Broadcast and SAT signed TV in HD format, are a piece of garbage, a lie.

bigshot wrote:I don't understand why if you care so much and your family males all the wrong choices in their own system, why you just don't go out and get a good rig for yourself.

Such thing, quality HD monitor or quality HD TV, do not exist, that's what I'm trying to say in this topic.I never tested a 4K Blu-Ray disc on a Blu-Ray player, but based in the 4K samples I got, some with 1GB for just 1:45 minutes, showed artefacts too.

I'm not angry with people. In this forum you were very nice. Thank you all for let me expose my feeling about this subject. You were very nice and tolerant with me. I really appreciate that.

I'm angry because I no longer can find a good TV on stores, and because what suposed should be advancement, in reality made things worse in many aspects. Angry because image on screen are not homogenoues and get worse if I move only 10 centimeters or less to the sides. Angry because image now looks faded (lifeless) or crussed and clipped for dynamics range if I tried to fix the fadded look.Angry because they push image without texture and details, and advertisse if like HD.Angry because most people accept these whole bunch of lies whitout complain to TV manufactures or TV Broadcast companies.

Don't worry. It's not the "USA angry standart" that leads to shooting in public places. it's more like feeling be made of fool.

Arndt wrote:You certainly feel strongly about this issue. But why are you so angry? Why are so many people so angry these days?

Last edited by All Darc on Mon Jan 16, 2017 1:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.

All Darc wrote:I didn't find anything decent to display any HD video. And the HD channels on my contry, TV Broadcast and SAT signed TV in HD format, are a piece of garbage, a lie. Such thing, quality HD monitor or quality HD TV, do not exist, that's what I'm trying to say in this topic.

You apparently live in a country that hasn't embraced digital video yet. Just because it doesn't exist where you live, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. The problem in your country isn't LCD or digital... it's your bandwidth options. I live in Los Angeles, which is a city built on media. We've had digital broadcast and cable and streaming for years. When it was first introduced, it was full of artifacts like you describe, because the infrastructure for pushing high bandwidth video wasn't in place yet. But now those times have changed in LA. We enjoy a wide selection of broadcast choices and equipment of all quality levels and price ranges. We have fiber optic connections in our homes that allow for massive throughput rates. If you lived here, you would be able to put together a system in your home as good as the best movie theaters. Maybe that doesn't exist yet where you live, but I can tell you that it does exist, because I've built it in my own house and I'm enjoying it almost every day.

I read people's posts online talking about how terrible Netflix's quality is- low resolution, banding, buffering constantly. It puzzles me, because I always get a solid clean HD image from Netflix. I started asking questions of these people in a few threads, and I found out that they were all in rural areas with regular cable internet. Their problem wasn't with Netflix. It was their internet provider and the obsolete infrastructure of the cable running to their home.

Your off axis viewing problem is because your family chose the wrong TV set. The artifacts are due to your bandwidth being insufficient due to old infrastructure. If you want good quality now, your solution would be a much better monitor and a blu-ray player.

Well, this argument can explain some issues of HD compression, but do not adress LCD distortions like poor rendering of shadows and poor rendering of highlights, faded look when we try image adjusts to avoide clipped whites & crushed shadows.

The same LCD TV models for sale here are on Amazon.com or eBay.

Are you sure your fiber optivs have signals with more than 1GB for each 90 seconds of 4K video? I got 4K HDR samples here. Recorded many on a Pen Drive and tested on TV:

Arndt wrote:Even as an inhabitant of the old world I have always been impressed by Benjamin Franklin's list of thirteen virtues. The older I get the more I see the sense in them. Here are my favourites:

Sincerity. Use no hurtful deceit; think innocently and justly, and, if you speak, speak accordingly.

Justice. Wrong none by doing injuries, or omitting the benefits that are your duty.

Moderation. Avoid extremes; forbear resenting injuries so much as you think they deserve.

Tranquillity. Be not disturbed at trifles, or at accidents common or unavoidable.

I fear these may have gone out of fashion. I cannot imagine Franklin kvetching about the quality of his 4K HD TV.

It's a film with the mentality of his diretor, wise in somethings and dumb as people back then in other things. About we accept it, to watch as a film or a historic curiosity, do not mean he or the people of his time was right. Franklin's winsdow means nothing if it's not or wasn't not applied to everyone. Well... at least he changed mind later about slavery.And I'm not black.

My problem with The Birth of a Nation is that the orginal camera negative still exist, but it wasn't restored from it, but from very duped materials. (GEH closed politic in this particular case, and not Mr Shepard fault)

All Darc wrote:Well, this argument can explain some issues of HD compression, but do not adress LCD distortions like poor rendering of shadows and poor rendering of highlights, faded look when we try image adjusts to avoide clipped whites & crushed shadows.

Your model is on the list. It shows that black levels start to drop off at 19 degrees. That isn't very good. Some monitors higher up on the list have decent viewing angles at 75 degrees. In general, LG and Sony appear to be the brands you would probably like a lot better than Samsung.

All Darc wrote:Native 1280x800pixels for just 42 dolars:

The contrast levels on that are awful. That would be fine for doing presentations at meetings, but you wouldn't want to watch movies on that.

Last edited by bigshot on Mon Jan 16, 2017 5:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Listen AllDarc, if I can make a suggestion? Why don't you write to the manufacturers about your problems? Also, contact your Government Department or Company responsible for supplying you with the Internet connection. It is no good, in my opinion, carping on and on here ad infinitum to the point of becoming positively boring.

FYI I have a poor internet connection because I am in a rural location. (I have to download You Tube files, because it is impossible to stream them). I have written to the people concerned and put up with the situation for the past three years - when I know something can be done about it. I have issued an ultimatum and when this expires I will go to the Government Ombudsman for a resolution. I could have gone on about it here, but that would not have served much purpose.

Regards fromDonald Binks

"So, she said: "Elly, it's no use letting Lou have the sherry glasses..."She won't appreciate them,she won't polish them..."You know what she's like." So I said:..."

Donald, they don't get a damn. Besides, people here accept any trash in terms of image and sound, so they don't need to care about offer real quality.

Donald Binks wrote:Listen AllDarc, if I can make a suggestion? Why don't you write to the manufacturers about your problems? Also, contact your Government Department or Company responsible for supplying you with the Internet connection.

All Darc wrote:I know OLED is the future, no distortion. But never saw in my city, and costs double, have no 4K, and lifespan is about 50%. And it's not very bright, accoding some people.

Get a better quality 1080p set then. You could probably find one for the same price you paid for the one you have. 4K doesn't really matter in a 50 inch set. 1080p would look just as sharp and you'd be able to afford one with better viewing angles. Or just sit directly in front of the set you've got when you watch it!

All Darc wrote:Donald, they don't get a damn. Besides, people here accept any trash in terms of image and sound, so they don't need to care about offer real quality.

I saw dozen of LED/LCD models on stores. Not a single one was decent for me. All models screw-up bright tones and shadows.

This model, that for me looks like garbage, got 65% of 5 star (evalution by consumers). This model it's what people considers very good. But for me it's a piece of trash.

I have a challenge for you. I challenge you to point a 4K clip in this collection that have no artefact. All dark sky (night) scenes with any degrade, have visible artefacts, making horrible digital pixelated gradientes:

If that's what you call great quality (almost a GB per minute in some videos), so there is no great quality HD or UHD (4K) digital video on this planet yet. I see artefacts shaking and moving everywhere all the time.

I'm feeling like that legend about Elvis had shot his TV. Don't worry, I have no guns in home. Anyway I would need to shot the TV 3 times. One for the screen angle, another for the highlights and shadows poor dynamics, and a third time for the artefacts.

[quote="All Darc"]What Franklin said about deceive consumers?He owned two slaves...[quote]

That's too simplistic:

"After Franklin returned from France in 1785, he joined and eventually became president of an abolitionist group founded a decade earlier by the Pennsylvania Quakers. The group was called the Society for Promoting the Abolition of Slavery and the Relief of Negroes Unlawfully Held in Bondage. Franklin was convinced that not only the slave trade, but slavery itself should be eliminated. He eventually freed his own two slaves."